Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

Commands & Colors: Napoleonics» Forums » General

Subject: CCN or CCA rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hello,

Both CCA & CCN are great and both rules seem to fit with their era.
Some players went to both game … and are certainly the right ones!
Some players stick to one of them … like me … but for how long?

This thread is not to here to prove anything, but to try to understand (even for myself) why I stick to CCN?

I was first “born” in the Richard Borg universe with M44. After numerous battles, expansions and personal scenarios saved online I went to BC150 witch I enjoy for the slower movements and time to great strategies.

In both games I made several “little” variations but I never touched the strangest rule to explain to the new players: the “constant power” of the units whatever the number of figs!

I KNOW I KNOW: tons of fans of CCA already explained it via tons of threads … but you know … who can explain why love is here or not?

THEN CCN ARRIVED!

First I tried to resist because of the blocks … then I cracked & bought it. WOOOW … I definitively felt in love with loads of mechanisms but mostly with the “relative power” rule of the units who are weaker & weaker with the loss of their figs!

NO PLEASE: I don’t want to argue again. I even don’t criticize here the « constant power » of CCA: I’m just speaking of LOVE!

So this is my first reason : I sold all my M44 & BC150 games and expansions to forget the “constant power” rule … it’s not to go back to it again via CCA (even with the battle-back that change things).

Another reason are my responsibilities (work & big family) that oblige me to CUT in my hobbies and concentrate on a very few ones!

Once again: CCA is great and I’m only here trying to convince myself to resist! What could attract me in CCA? The era, the exotic units, the simplicity of the battle lands, the importance of the formations with their leaders and the great number of scenarios.

But another point that stopped me cold from cracking: some CCA expansions are no more in stock. That would make me wait for as long time as CCN new expansions and maybe more because I don’t think that CCA will get the priority on the publication of their old expansions!

A last point:

I often heard that CCN was “more complicated”. Well … maybe. But for my poor 49 old brain, believe me, I suffered when I tried on Vassal to play some CCA scenarios after playing lots of CCN! At CCN all the units retreat of 1 hex. At CCA it’s confusing with the auxiliaries only 1 retreat, other green units retreating of 2 and cavalry of 2, 3 or 4 … thus making the preparation of the attacks complex. The leader influencing sometimes the units around them (helmet bonus) and sometime only the attached units (ignore retreat & pursuit)!

In fact each game is “complex” for the player used to the other one … and for the old warriors like me!

Sometime I crack on Vassal because there are more players on CCA … but I try to bring them to CCN lol … and some gentlemen accept. I hope the CCN Vassal community will increase with the time!

Both game great indeed …

Message (joke) to GMT: If it’s your goal: I won’t crack! If you want me to spend more money in these beautiful games: just give us the CCN expansions! LOL
4 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guido Gloor
Switzerland
Ostermundigen
Bern
flag msg tools
The statement below is false.
badge
The statement above is correct.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There's P500 expansions coming up for both CCA (Sparta!) and CCN (Spaniards), so get your wallet ready I have both on preorder.

Personally I prefer CCA, but I can see the attraction of CCN.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miguel (working on TENNISmind...)
France
Caen
(from Valencia, Spain)
flag msg tools
designer
My latest game: Big*Bang, a simple abstract about the first minutes of the Universe
badge
My best-rated game: TETRARCHIA, about the tetrarchy that saved Rome
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Guillaume, I'll address some of your points. (not the constant power one!)

First, of course when you get used to any one of the C&C games it is hard to change to another, because there are many things in common and a few differences, and you need to remember all these differences. But objectively, for someone comming from outside C&C, I think that CCN is the more complex one, even if for wargame standards it is not a complex game. CCA is one step below.

Second, I see some people playing all the incarnations of the system, and being still active in many of them. But I think that each of these games is so great and provides a so complete gaminig experience that concentrating in one (plus all its expansion, of course) is the best way to go. If you find yours, then you have hundreds of games ahead. It seems that you did with CCN, I did with CCA.

I already sold my M44 (kept my travel version, just in case...), I'm considering selling BattleLore, and I don't think I'll step in CCN. My gaming time is not so big in order to hold several of these games, with all their small differences. Now, if you have plenty of time, and get bored of playing a lot the one you have, then you should go ahead with another one!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
phd phdphd
msg tools

CCN is a treat because:

1- we love the Napo wars era! So many battles, so many armies involved in only 15 years or so!

2- The gameplay fits very well with the tactics of the time and with the specificities of the various units.

3- it is simple and fast. My 8-year old son defeated me on our second play. My 12-year old son beats me most of the time (both of them play on the English-Portuguese side)!

Great game, can't wait for the expansion sets!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ad1642
Canada
Montréal
Québec
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Why choose?

Most die hard fans of hex & counter games will buy many many games that use the same system, CDG gamers will do the same, the Command & Colors system is relatively young, and I don't feel the need to limit myself to only one iteration of the system. I see it as the beginning of a great series of games, if quality of game development is maintained through the different series (as it is so far) then the future is great.

I am currently playing CCN, but there is no way I'm getting rid of CCA, Memoir or even Battlecry.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Orion J.N. Winder
United States
Holly Hill
South Carolina
flag msg tools
ALL ACCESS - ALL THE TIME - DON'T EVEN ASK
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yep, playing and keeping them all, and just for kicks...
Order of preferance:
1) C&C:A
2) C&C:N
3) BattleLore
4) Memoir 44
5) BattleCry (original)

But right now they seem to "hit the table" more like

1) C&C:N
2) Memoir 44
3) C&C:A
and trailing way behind BattleLore and BattleCry

But I'm about to introduce a newbee to Ancients, so should get back up to the top like it belongs
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have and play 'em all, too. Some folks will play some and not the others. But all get played at one time or another.

C&C:A
C&C:N — These are the two I play the most these days.

BattleLore — Used to play this one quite a bit.

BattleCry
Memoir:44 — Have been playing the new edition of BattleCry more than Memoir lately. Again, Memoir once saw a good share of table time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm jut pleased that both games offer such a different gaming challenge from the same core rule platform. I thought C&C:N would leapfrog C&C:A in my preferences (I have a strong interest in both periods) but to my surprise it didn't. For my gaming time, C&C:A is more dynamic.....it has just as much tactical meat and I get more excited playing it. C&C:N is a fine game and I really enjoy it, but I can't see it ever replacing C&C:A at the head of my table. I am really glad to be able to play both and am looking forward to the coming expansions.

Brent.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting opinions and CCA supports ... but love as no rules!

After some experiments of CCA on Vassal ... I still prefer CCN for many reasons but that would not be usefull to explain to people loving as strongly CCA forever lol!

My only and stupid argument: with CCA I got some headach and feel sometimes like playing chess in the middle of all thoses colors who are more complex than they seems (I really don't like the color system of CCA) and thoses constant formations. I know: it's maybe what you actually love. Respect. But for me I feel with CCN the game more "fluid" (does this word exist in english?)! The units runs like water and turn around each other so the strategy seems more quick to choose, the game much more dynamic and less mathematic.

OK I can't explain ... Have fun with both games, I just --->

ninja
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim bo
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When referring to rule complexity I find that all the C&C titles are on lighter end of the scale compared with traditional wargames so to argue that one is more complex than another is splitting hairs in my opinion.

I feel BC150 falls short because the rule changes introduce some but not all of the improvements found in CCN. Diminishing firepower with block losses the most obvious example.

If keeping the BC150 rule system simple is the reason then that's a lost opportunity. In an ideal world I'd suggest each iteration of a C&C game incorporate the "latest enhancements" from the most recent C&C title so that the benefits from continuous improvement is maximised.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Miller
United States
West Jefferson
NC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I bought C&C Ancients just to familiarize myself with the system when I heard about Napoleonics coming out. It turned out that I loved C&C A, but it hasn't been on the table since I got C&C N. There is just not enough of my limited table time for them both right now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yojimbo252 wrote:
When referring to rule complexity I find that all the C&C titles are on lighter end of the scale compared with traditional wargames so to argue that one is more complex than another is splitting hairs in my opinion.

I feel BC150 falls short because the rule changes introduce some but not all of the improvements found in CCN. Diminishing firepower with block losses the most obvious example.

If keeping the BC150 rule system simple is the reason then that's a lost opportunity. In an ideal world I'd suggest each iteration of a C&C game incorporate the "latest enhancements" from the most recent C&C title so that the benefits from continuous improvement is maximised.


I can't speak to BC150, having never played BC, but I don't agree that every development for a new game in the system is necessarily an enhancement to the system as a whole. C&C:A is a perfect fit for its period and I feel Richard Borg hit a sweet spot with his system there.....and the new elements introduced in C&C:N, while perfect for that game, would diminish C&C:A (particularly the leader rules, the more constrained ordering options and even the diminishing block/battle dice rules which make sense for massed firepower but don't for ranked phalanx and manipular legion warfare). I see C&C:A and C&C:N as different games for different times, both high points of different paths of the system but neither superior to the other.

Brent.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Agree with you Brent.

... and jalous that you must be so close to the world Rugby Championship!!!

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BrentS
Australia
Sydney
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GGleize wrote:
Agree with you Brent.

... and jalous that you must be so close to the world Rugby Championship!!!

;)


Not that close......and not a huge rugby fan. :(

Brent.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim bo
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
goshublue wrote:
Yojimbo252 wrote:
When referring to rule complexity I find that all the C&C titles are on lighter end of the scale compared with traditional wargames so to argue that one is more complex than another is splitting hairs in my opinion.

I feel BC150 falls short because the rule changes introduce some but not all of the improvements found in CCN. Diminishing firepower with block losses the most obvious example.

If keeping the BC150 rule system simple is the reason then that's a lost opportunity. In an ideal world I'd suggest each iteration of a C&C game incorporate the "latest enhancements" from the most recent C&C title so that the benefits from continuous improvement is maximised.


I can't speak to BC150, having never played BC, but I don't agree that every development for a new game in the system is necessarily an enhancement to the system as a whole. C&C:A is a perfect fit for its period and I feel Richard Borg hit a sweet spot with his system there.....and the new elements introduced in C&C:N, while perfect for that game, would diminish C&C:A (particularly the leader rules, the more constrained ordering options and even the diminishing block/battle dice rules which make sense for massed firepower but don't for ranked phalanx and manipular legion warfare). I see C&C:A and C&C:N as different games for different times, both high points of different paths of the system but neither superior to the other.

Brent.

I should have clarified I'm not advocating change for change sake and only those enhancements that are deemed appropriate for that game and period be considered.

I wouldn't for one moment advocate the next iteration of Mem44 introduce squares or anything silly like that and I appreciate why CCA doesn't include diminishing battle dice with block losses due to the limited frontage and increased depth of ancient formations compared with more modern warfare as well as blocks representing the coherency and morale of the ancient unit as much as individual soldiers.

The main point of my post is *if* it is decided that an existing C&C title's rule system is to receive an overhaul or a new title introduced, then I don't believe complexity should be a barrier to incorporating rule enhancements that have already been proven successful from previous games.

And before I get myself into any hot water with CCA enthusiasts, I'm not making any assertion that CCA needs an overhaul, that's why I used BC as my example because clearly it did.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter B
United States
Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, having made a CC:N player aid, I think I'm in a good position to make the claim that CC:N combat is more complex. That's not a good or bad thing. It's just different.

CC:A combat tables have just as many exceptions as CC:N, but generally speaking you use fewer of them in any given battle, and the rules themselves are simpler. So generally speaking in any given CC:A game I look at the player aid once to remind myself that Auxilia roll 3 dice in melee, and from then on I remember it. In CC:N my nose is constantly buried in the player aid remembering that the Fredonian Line Infantry rolls 1 die per block in melee, but only 1/2 die per block (rounded down) in ranged combat, etc etc, and that the artillery rolls different dice depending on how many hexes away they are, and so on. And then that all gets inevitably modified by terrain, uphill vs. downhill, and the like.

The biggest single difference that impacts me is that the terrain setup in CC:N is much, much more intricate. You might view this as a plus: it feels more realistic! But the down-side is that I can whip out CC:A, declare that we're going to play a scenario that takes place in the empty desert, and be playing inside of 5 minutes, whereas with pretty much any CC:N scenario I'm committing to an extra 15 minutes or so to get everything sorted.

Again, this doesn't mean either game is better or worse than the other. But I often find myself in situations where I can say "OK, time for a game. I've got about an hour." In that specific scenario, CC:A wins. Your mileage may vary.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.